Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's factually incorrect. They would accept them into the risk pool if they could charge premiums based on their assessed risk level. That's what actuarial algorithms are for. Duh.
You want to be captive to a crappy job just so that you can maintain health care coverage for an ongoing medical problem?
Quote:
Before the ACA, your employer plan couldn’t deny you coverage or charge you more, but it could exclude coverage for your pre-existing conditions for a year if you don’t maintain continuous insurance coverage. That’s what the plans would revert to if the ACA’s provisions are overturned. (Large and small group plans would face worse outcomes.)
As Timothy Jost, an emeritus professor of law at Washington and Lee University, writes, the biggest impact on those with employer insurance is that it would “lock you into” your jobs once again. The ACA gave some people more freedom to leave jobs and pursue entrepreneurial or freelance jobs, because they were guaranteed to find health insurance coverage. (An October 2017 survey of 5,400 small-business owners found that one-third “had the confidence to start their own businesses because they had access to health care through the ACA.”) It also gives more freedom to leave an unfulfilling job you’re keeping simply for the benefits. That wasn’t a given before, and could be on the line once again.
This will be the reality if people like you fight against your own self-interest!
Quote:
I received my insurance cards and a bill. I first noticed that I was now paying twice as much for our insurance as I had been. Then I noticed that the envelope held only three insurance cards; there wasn’t one for Zade. This insurance company, and five more after that, decided that my son might cost them too much money because of those seizures, which they called a pre-existing condition. So they simply rejected him from coverage
Good luck with that right here in the good ol USA if you don't have a Gold policy and some healthy co-pays. You're missing the forest for the trees.
We can do better than those countries at anything we set our mind to. I have faith in us. I'm saddened that so many right wingers don't.
Anytime someone says "we can do better" I take it as our private businesses, not our incompetent government. They cant even get their stuff together to agree on a budget or other basic administrative tasks.
Get the government out, other than simple but effective regulation and let private business figure it out. Let the government deal with ONLY the ones that private business cant do in profitable manner.
Anytime someone says "we can do better" I take it as our private businesses, not our incompetent government. They cant even get their stuff together to agree on a budget or other basic administrative tasks.
Get the government out, other than simple but effective regulation and let private business figure it out. Let the government deal with ONLY the ones that private business cant do in profitable manner.
You're mistaking won't for can't. Government for the people by the people. They are us. We can change and have continually throughout our existence. From better to worse lately, but we're not done.
Our government has done some of the most incredible things imaginable in the past. It's sad you've been brainwashed to think you know we never will again. You're wrong.
Education, infrastructure, military....and healthcare. Things capitalism doesn't handle well. The proof is in the pudding.
Otherwise known as HMOs, which used the exact same capitation model, and Americans universally hated. Why? Rationing and insufficient medical treatment resulted. There was no incentive for health care providers to provide appropriate health care after the capitation amount was consumed as appropriate treatments were routinely denied reimbursement, leaving either health care providers taking a loss or patients holding the bag.
I remember seeing this movie at the cineplex. As stated in the article linked below, the entire audience erupted in applause and whistles at this scene. The entire audience...
Medicare doesn't work like the VA. First of all, to even qualify for Medicare, one must have made at least 10 years of Medicare tax payments before eligibility for benefits (from a full-time job). Many people make 30-40 years worth of those payments before they can enroll in Medicare at age 65. And even once they enroll, there's a monthly premium for Medicare which is deducted from their SS check. There's also deductibles, a 20% co-pay, and limitations on certain benefits like the amount of hospitalization days they're allowed. If seniors want prescription and/or medical device, dental, and vision coverage, they have to pay even more to buy supplemental policies for that, themselves, out of their own pocket. Hearing aids, as well, aren't covered.
Make Medicaid like that, as well. No free healthcare for anyone other than veterans who qualify.
Make Medicaid like that, as well. No free healthcare for anyone other than veterans who qualify.
.
Just to give you an anecdotal example of who might fall through the monumental cracks that your suggestion would have.
One of my good friends was disabled (shot in the head in a freak accident for which he had no culpability) when he was 18. He would've been a very productive member of society otherwise. His family is working class and couldn't afford the million dollar plus bills initially even if they had cashed out everything they owned, let alone the tremendous costs going forward (the last 30 years).
Status:
"81 Years, NOT 91 Felonies"
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,595,865 times
Reputation: 5696
Insurance is not gambling, it's risk management. To claim it is the former is to misunderstand what gambling actually is.
Gambling is two things:
1) the introducing of a risk of loss that previously did not exist (e.g., a sports bet). AND,
2) the betmaker/risktaker had plausible control over whether or not that risk would exist (the betmaker could have refused to enter into the bet).
Insurance deals with risks that cannot be eliminated, and usually even not plausibly reduced to trivial. In this case, cancer risk can't be reduced to zero, no matter how many precautions a person takes. Same thing for other non-trivial health problems, or even accidents causing injury requiring expensive hospitalization. This is because the very nature of living existence can't help but have a risk of serious health problems or serious accidents, regardless of how careful the person is. It follows that the person cannot zero-out the risks associated with a living or even healthy existence itself. That is what makes gambling a poor analogy to taking out insurance policies.
As for making private insurers covering pre-existing condions, well, that simply highlights the flaws of letting the free market pay for health expenses. Private companies are by their very nature profit-making entities first and foremost. Therefore, they will seek to wiggle their way out of the contract to the extent they can get away with it. Laws and insurance regulations deal with this by putting limits on what insurers can wiggle out of (plausible meaning of contract terms, controlling the very terms of the contract itself, etc.). Thus, it's frankly absurd to insist that private insurers can be more fair about their coverage than a government-run health care system can be. The only arguable way to have private insurers as a plausible alternative is to so tightly control the private insurers that they are practically creatures of the state.
You're mistaking won't for can't. Government for the people by the people. They are us. We can change and have continually throughout our existence. From better to worse lately, but we're not done.
Our government has done some of the most incredible things imaginable in the past. It's sad you've been brainwashed to think you know we never will again. You're wrong.
Education, infrastructure, military....and healthcare. Things capitalism doesn't handle well. The proof is in the pudding.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't mean to make such a blatant personal attack, calling me sad and brainwashed.
With that said, our education and infrastructure are an absolute disaster and embarrassing when compared to what other countries do, and part of it is because of how much we grossly overspend on the military.
I don't buy the government "by the people" at this point, its government by the career politicians, lobbyists, and lawyers. Sure that can change one day, but I put higher odds on a collapse or other unstable ending rather than "the people" just gently changing that status.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
